Parking Eye - Debt Collectors letter for 30 sec overstay.

Coupon-mad

Dawn74 wrote: »

Ok now I have received an email from the church secretary saying the following :

Dear xxxxx

Thank you for you original email dated 12th August, unfortunately I was away on holiday. First all I would like to know the date of your Parking Fine as of the Bank Holiday weekend in May and the first weekend in June we did indeed have some problems with our Parking Eye cameras and perhaps this is when the problem has occurred.

I am sorry that you during your visit to our Parish here in Newquay you received this Parking Fine. The Parish does have a contract with Parking Eye to provide equipment etc for our Car Park. However, the Parish does not receive any money from the fines issued nor does it procure payment of fines. Our income depends solely on the tickets purchased by those who wish to park in the Car Park.

You indicate that the fine is excessive but the parking conditions are clearly stated on the seven notices that are placed around the car park. As I have stated the parish receives no income at all from the fines and have no desire for anyone to receive a fine from Parking Eye. Parking Eye does not act on our behalf in issuing fines. If you are only 1 second over your time they will instantly issue a Parking Fine.

Once again I am sorry that you received a fine and I hope that it did not spoil your stay in Cornwall. I look forward to hearing from you in due course with regards the date that you parked in our Car Park.

Three points stick out to me :

First, the date is 30th May - it wasn't bank holiday w/e when the ticket was issued. This means the cameras were faulty the Monday before this date should I ask for certificate of calibration or something ?

Secondly: she has also admitted that PE send out parking tickets even if over 1 second!! - continuously breaching BPA CoP section 13.4 grace periods.

So your ticket being Friday 30th May was within those 2 weekends she's talking about. I would reply (nice and politely as she might be able to cancel it!) and tell her 'yes, my ticket was issued in that period when you say you had problems with your ParkingEye cameras, because the date was Friday 30th May. Please tell me what problems were experienced and whether PE have been told to cancel tickets issued at the end of May/start of June?

Then add that you are surprised to read PE issued 'fines' because they cannot; no person or firm can issue fines, only the courts can.

And say you are even more surprised that PE can issue a ticket after one second, as in fact that is a breach of the BPA code of practice. Ask can she please check their ParkingEye site agreement and User Manual because in fact they are required to allow a 'grace period' which in practice in other Newquay car parks run by PE is known to be 15 or 20 minutes grace. To have no grace period must be a mistake so can she please check and confirm the facts as set out in their agreement with PE?

Thirdly : if the church own the land she has stated that PE do not act on behalf of the church when issuing fines - so am I right in thinking that PE have no right to issue fines at all as the landowner hasn't given permission and or have not got a contract between myself and the landowner ?

No she's just muddled and trying hard to distance the church from PE. They do issue tickets on behalf of the landowner. But you could ask her to clarify and ask nicely for a copy of the contract...

Finally send the BPA everything you can and you could even say you sent the NTK back with your appeal letter (if it was posted) which would explain its absence. Show the BPA the Church's reply as well, including the fact the cameras were faulty exactly around the date of your ticket (which PE has not told you but the Church has) and that the Church is saying there's a zero grace period to read signs and decide whether to park/and to drive out. Ask the BPA to investigate these facts the Church has raised.

Sometimes PPCs do indeed cancel when you rattle the cages of the landowner and the BPA (PE won't want an investigation into a faulty camera over a 2 week period) so it may well get cancelled even now! So rattle both those cages politely and firmly again...

MothballsWallet

trisontana wrote: »

Why on earth is a church getting mixed up with these cowboys? <snip>

Because:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoYWdHe4tQ4

that's why

MothballsWallet

bazster wrote: »

First you said it was the Trinity Church car park, then you said it was the golf club's car park! Now I see it's reverted to being the church's car park again!

If my memory serves correctly, the OP said that it's the car park for the church, but the actual land is registered to the golf club (Dawn: is this correct?).

Dawn74

Thanks everyone for your input. I will email the church secretary back with the points you have raised.

With regards to the landownership I sent a complaint to the newquay golf club and Peter Batty the manager replied as below :

I am sorry to hear about your problem but Newquay Golf Club are not the landowner of the Trinity Church Car Park, the Catholic Church are.

You may have to redirect your complaint to them.

Kind Regards

Peter Batty
Secretary/Manager
Newquay Golf Club

So emailed the church with my complaint.

I did explain in my complaint to the church the 'grace period' relating to the BPA quoting the breach etc. but she has just brushed over this really.

I will ask about the contract, ANPR accuracy and if PE have advised to cancel tickets for these dates.
However I do think she has said this because she thinks it was from this May not May 2013 as stated in my email to them. But I will push for a clarification on accuracy anyway.

Going on holiday tomorrow for a week so I will keep you posted on my return. ( another holiday they have ruined so far ;-( )

Dawn74

Gulp - this is the email I sent back to the secretary at the church. Not that she will do anything. Better than nothing - hopefully as mentioned it will "rattle a few cages" !!!

Dear Charmaine,

Thank you so much for your quick response, this is very much appreciated.

The date we visited was 30th May 2013, so it was the 2 weeks you have mentioned in your previous email. You mentioned that your ParkingEye cameras were faulty during this period please can you tell me what problems you experienced and if ParkingEye have been told to cancel tickets for this period for the end of May, start of June 2013?
Please can I ask you for a copy of the maintenance sheet and calibration certificate for the automated number plate recognition cameras?

I am surprised to read ParkingEye issues 'fines' because they cannot, no person or company can issue fines, only the courts/judges can.

Also I am even more surprised that ParkingEye can issue a charge after one second, as in fact that is a breach of the British Parking Association code of practice as mentioned in my email below. Please can I ask you to check your ParkingEye site agreement and User Manual because in fact they are required to allow a 'grace period' which is in practice in other Newquay car parks run by ParkingEye this is known to be 15 or 20 minutes grace.

Also refer to recent case referring to short overstays:
3JD08399 ParkingEye v Ms X. (Altrincham 17/03/2014). Fistral Beach. The defendant spent 31 minutes waiting for a car park space during the crowded holiday season. The ANPR evidence was therefore not relevant as it showed the time in the car park, not the time parked. The judge ruled this was not against the terms and conditions of the signage. The judge also stated that in any case £100 was not likely to be a true pre-estimate of loss.
In an important case, the judge ruled that the 31 minutes the defendant spent driving round the crowded car park in Whit week did not classify as 'parking'. The ANPR evidence only showed the time of entry and exit to the car park, and not the true time parked. The signage only required payment for times parked, and therefore there was no contravention of the terms and conditions.

So to have no grace period must be a mistake, therefore please can you check and confirm the facts as set out in your agreement with ParkingEye.
It does seem that ParkingEye are over enforcing these times in order to punish people and maximise profits to the detriment of visitors who try to do the "right thing" by paying the car park charge which you then receive.

Lastly, please can you clarify that the church owns the land where ParkingEye operate? As ParkingEye can only act on behalf of the landowner and cannot issue "parking charge notices" without the landowners permission. Even then the landowner can only recoup the total losses incurred which in this case would be 1.33p.
This agreement will be stated in the contract between the landowner and ParkingEye. Please can you also clarify this? If it is possible could you please send me a copy of the contract so I can read this myself that would be most helpful.

We actually loved Cornwall at the time but unfortunately this has now put a black cloud over our stay. Unfortunately we will not be visiting Newquay again because of this issue.

I look forward to your reply and your clarification to my questions.


Let's see if she can pull some strings - doubt but worth a try.
Thanks for everyone's help. I really appreciate your time and expertise.

Redx

well, I for one think thats an excellent letter , and a dialogue with the landowner could definitely help your case if PE are silly enough to take it further , especially if you think that the landowner may not wish to take you to court and you are proving who that landowner is which means you can easily state in your defence that PE have no locus standii (no right to bring about a court case) if only the church can do so

all good grist for the mill and good evidence in any LBCCC or court stage , or for forcing it to ADR by popla where you would state the same aspects like the altrincham case

also good to have clarification over the land ownership too, its either the church (probably) or the golf club (I doubt it now)

so well done and keep going , and please update us on any final outcome as well as the intervening part

Coupon-mad

Seconded - a very polite email yet well-worded to fish for evidence or cancellation!

Dawn74

I'm so glad it was a fitting email. Hopefully it was worth the stress.

Of course I will let you know. Once I have heard from Charmaine I will post her reply. I have a standby email to ParkingEye ready to be tweaked with her information as well, but already sent a second appeal earlier this week. At least if I send another listing of what I have found they have to file it.

Take a look at this email not yet sent to ParkingEye but can be tweaked with info from church :


Dear Sir or Madam

Ref: PCN number - xxxxxxxxxxxxx

This is in addition to my original appeal letter dated June 2013 and also my recent email appeal on the 13th August 2014.

I have received your parking charge notice for the 30th May 2013, and have recently complained in the strongest terms to your client Holy Trinity Church, Newquay. (See below my email and their reply). No doubt you convinced them that your operation is some sort of 'parking space maximisation scheme' when it is nothing of the sort and is simply there to maximise your own profits.

As the registered keeper of the vehicle, I again decline your invitation to pay said charge now standing at £150. This is my appeal and all liability to your company is denied on the following basis:

A) The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The amount charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to yourself or the landowner. According to the Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations, parking charges on private land must not exceed the cost to the landowner during the period the motorist is parked there. In my case, the original £100 charge being asked for far exceeds the cost to the landowner of £4.80 for 3 hours. (2.66p per minute since you say that there was an overstay of 30 seconds this would amount to 1.33p)

You are not the landowner and do not have locus standi. The Holy Trinity Church have advised that they are the landowner.

See extract from an email I received from the church secretary, Charmaine Messer :

"As I have stated the parish receives no income at all from the fines and have no desire for anyone to receive a fine from Parking Eye. Parking Eye does not act on our behalf in issuing fines."

She also mentions the word 'fine' a number of times which this is not, as you can confirm you are not a court or a judge.

C) You are breaching section 13.4 of the British Parking Association. - 'grace period'
The fact is that you have an issued a charge notice for a 30 second overstay, again another extract from the Holy Trinity Church secretary :

"If you are only 1 second over your time they will instantly issue a Parking Fine."

"They" is referring to you as ParkingEye.

see recent case studies below:

See letter from Hill-Dickinson to Parking-Prankster dated 6th March 2014, document reference: 122805654-1

You instructed Hill-Dickinson to take legal action against the "Parking-Prankster" because you said he was lying when you charged clients for very short overstays.

Extract from Hill-Dickinson letter to 'Parking-Prankster' :
"You allege, that our client issues parking charges for very short overstays and does not allow a five minute grace period. This is simply untrue."

In light of the fact I am being overcharged for a 30 second overstay, I wonder whether you could confirm either that you will cancel my ticket, or that you were lying when you informed Hill-Dickinson that you never charge for very short overstays. I will therefore be sending my case to
Katie.mickleburgh@hilldickinson.com so she can see for herself that in fact you do issue invoices for short overstays.

Also refer to recent case referring to short overstays:
3JD08399 ParkingEye v Ms X. (Altrincham 17/03/2014). Fistral Beach. The defendant spent 31 minutes waiting for a car park space during the crowded holiday season. The ANPR evidence was therefore not relevant as it showed the time in the car park, not the time parked. The judge ruled this was not against the terms and conditions of the signage. The judge also stated that in any case £100 was not likely to be a true pre-estimate of loss.
In an important case, the judge ruled that the 31 minutes the defendant spent driving round the crowded car park in Whit week did not classify as 'parking'. The ANPR evidence only showed the time of entry and exit to the car park, and not the true time parked. The signage only required payment for times parked, and therefore there was no contravention of the terms and conditions.

Please be advised that I have also written a stern email to the British Parking Association asking to investigate this charge and this breach.

D) You have not replied to my original appeal letter from June 2013.
After posting my original appeal I have not received acknowledgement of this and now received a letter from your debt collectors for £150.
As you have not replied in the first instance you have not given me the right to appeal through POPLA or IAS and have not supplied me with a code to do so. As per paragraph 21.12 of the British Parking Association code of practice.

E) ANPR accuracy
Also within the email from the parish secretary, Charmaine Messer with the following information:

"First all I would like to know the date of your Parking Fine as of the Bank Holiday weekend in May and the first weekend in June we did indeed have some problems with our Parking Eye cameras and perhaps this is when the problem has occurred"

Under paragraph 21.3 of the BPA Code of Practice, it requires parking companies to make sure ANPR equipment is maintained and in correct working order. I require ParkingEye to provide records with dates and times of when the equipment was checked, calibrated, maintained and synchronised with the timer which stamps the photo to ensure the accuracy of the ANPR images. This is important as the parking charge issued is founded entirety on 2 photos of my vehicle entering the car park and leaving the car park at specific times
If there was a fault due to the Inaccuracy of your ANPR cameras at this time, have you revoked all tickets over this period, including mine.

Please refer to case study ParkingEye v Fox-Jones on 8 Nov 2013 where you lost I court due to ANPR Inaccuracy.
That case was dismissed when the judge said the evidence from ParkingEye was fundamentally flawed because the synchronisation of the camera pictures with the timer had been called into question and the operator could not rebut the point.

If you choose not to cancel this invoice you must issue a rejection letter in reply to my appeal, explaining:

1) The total pre-estimate of loss incurred.
2) Proof of your locus standi to offer contracts to drivers at this site.
3) A copy of your contract with Holy Trinity Church stating you do not hold a "grace period" on this car park.
4) Why you have not replied to my original appeal letter and not provided a POPLA / IAS code enabling to appeal to said authorities within YOUR given time frames. Plus provide a POPLA code so I may appeal at this stage.
5) A copy of the signage site map and close-up pictures of the signs in situ at the time, taken at a comparable time of day in similar light conditions. Calibration, maintenance certificates timed and dated to show the ANPR equipment on the site were correct at the time the invoice was issued.

Please do not send me a standard formatted letter as this is not satisfactory. Also please do you state that this appeal is rejected due to late submission as there is evidence that ParkingEye have accepted appeals after 'your' set 28 day period in the past so your practices should be consistent for all.
If this appeal is accepted then I expect this invoice to be cancelled immediately and a letter of confirmation sent stating this fact and that no further action to be taken and all court proceedings have been stopped.

I look forward to your letter.

Yours faithfully.

Xxxxxxxxx


Let me know if there is something that can be added/ subtracted etc....
Won't be able to see if I still have a copy of my original appeal letter on file until I get back to work on the 26th.
May get chance to log in when on hols to check status. Happy holidays !! NOT!!
Thanks in advance.

Umkomaas

Just a few amendments.

As you have not replied in the first instance you have not given me the right to appeal through POPLA [STRIKE]or IAS[/STRIKE] and have not supplied me with a code to do so. As per paragraph 21.12 of the British Parking Association code of practice.

Please do not send me a standard [STRIKE]formatted[/STRIKE] template letter as this is not satisfactory.

Also please do [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE] not state that this appeal is rejected due to late submission as there is evidence that ParkingEye have accepted appeals after 'your' set 28 day period in the past so your practices should be consistent for all.

HTH

Coupon-mad

Calibration, maintenance certificates timed and dated to show the ANPR equipment on the site were correct at the time the invoice was issued. should be point #6 on its own line.